I try to be high quality on RuneGear, but now I ask myself: How do I do this?
Some people sees quality as writing long posts that stays on topic, but I can write a long post that is really really low quality.
Some people sees quality as writing helpful posts that stays on topic, but then I ask myself, can't helpful be low quality? Yeah, it still can, as quality does count as long posts also.
Some people sees quality as having good grammar and stays on topic. Well, is this high quality? No it's not! It's high grammar skills, sure it can be two things, but people can have good grammar but still be low quality.
Is quality all this together? Good grammar, helpful posts and long posts? No, in that case, I prefer short posts as then it helps someone and they don't have to read the whole wiki.
Now, while writing this, I kinda figured it out. Quality must be being helpful with understandable grammar, as easy to understand and as short as possible. Sure, a long posts does look better, but it takes longer time to read. I mean, if someone asks the question... for example... "Why is people low quality?" you don't have to write a book about it, you can just post a simple answer that still answers the question asked.
Does grammar flaws make you low quality? My opinion, just huge grammar flaws. Like typing "hej jo don umdestan vat dis sajs!" as it takes time to understand, so instead of typing "Hey you don't understand what this says!" you type that, that is indeed low quality, but if you type "hey you dont understand what this says" I could still consider it being high quality, as you still understand what it says, even though there is some grammar flaws.
Does short posts make you low quality? No, just if your posts are waaay off topic and/or doesn't help the OP, then yes, it is low quality. If this is the OP and someone say "Haider I am not low quality", it doesn't have anything to do with the original post. But if someone says "I don't agree with this", well, it is not low quality, but as it doesn't state anything more, it can be considered low quality.
Does 'spamming' make you low quality? Yes, but 'wale' he wasn't spamming. Now I am just using Wale as an example because people were flaming on him because he was posting a lot.
Here is the definition on spam: Unsolicited e-mail, often of a commercial nature, sent indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups; junk e-mail.
Now I know it isn't really the right description, but still, he wasn't spamming. He was just being active. Yes indeed, he had a reason for being active, but does that make you low quality? My opinion, no, it doesn't.
Does long posts make you low quality? No, it doesn't, as long as it is stays on topic. But if they take forever to explain nothing, it could be considered low quality. If it is a detailed guide on how to do something, it is great, as then it probably has a great explained and detailed guide.
Some people sees quality as writing long posts that stays on topic, but I can write a long post that is really really low quality.
Some people sees quality as writing helpful posts that stays on topic, but then I ask myself, can't helpful be low quality? Yeah, it still can, as quality does count as long posts also.
Some people sees quality as having good grammar and stays on topic. Well, is this high quality? No it's not! It's high grammar skills, sure it can be two things, but people can have good grammar but still be low quality.
Is quality all this together? Good grammar, helpful posts and long posts? No, in that case, I prefer short posts as then it helps someone and they don't have to read the whole wiki.
Now, while writing this, I kinda figured it out. Quality must be being helpful with understandable grammar, as easy to understand and as short as possible. Sure, a long posts does look better, but it takes longer time to read. I mean, if someone asks the question... for example... "Why is people low quality?" you don't have to write a book about it, you can just post a simple answer that still answers the question asked.
Does grammar flaws make you low quality? My opinion, just huge grammar flaws. Like typing "hej jo don umdestan vat dis sajs!" as it takes time to understand, so instead of typing "Hey you don't understand what this says!" you type that, that is indeed low quality, but if you type "hey you dont understand what this says" I could still consider it being high quality, as you still understand what it says, even though there is some grammar flaws.
Does short posts make you low quality? No, just if your posts are waaay off topic and/or doesn't help the OP, then yes, it is low quality. If this is the OP and someone say "Haider I am not low quality", it doesn't have anything to do with the original post. But if someone says "I don't agree with this", well, it is not low quality, but as it doesn't state anything more, it can be considered low quality.
Does 'spamming' make you low quality? Yes, but 'wale' he wasn't spamming. Now I am just using Wale as an example because people were flaming on him because he was posting a lot.
Here is the definition on spam: Unsolicited e-mail, often of a commercial nature, sent indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups; junk e-mail.
Now I know it isn't really the right description, but still, he wasn't spamming. He was just being active. Yes indeed, he had a reason for being active, but does that make you low quality? My opinion, no, it doesn't.
Does long posts make you low quality? No, it doesn't, as long as it is stays on topic. But if they take forever to explain nothing, it could be considered low quality. If it is a detailed guide on how to do something, it is great, as then it probably has a great explained and detailed guide.